Главная > Реферат >Остальные работы

Сохрани ссылку в одной из сетей:

Marxist and Feminist interpretations
on the aftermath of rape reforms

In the beginning
of her essay, MacDonald states that the current legal reforms are
ineffective due to their attempt to cure symptoms of the root cause.
Meanwhile, the root cause remains legislatively untouched.

She also gives
various examples of how implementation of the new rape law statutes
is scattered. The major decision maker, the prosecutor, and his
discretionary powers limit the power of these new reforms. In a
contrast of methods of prosecution before the rape law reforms to
those after the reforms, she states there is little change. The idea
that women lie about being victimized is still adhered to, despite
the new reform laws.

The
Marxist-Feminist perspectives on these reforms are as follows: the
capitalist society serves only the interests of the upper class. “The
state protects class as well as sexual inequality.” The upper
class, in order to match the Feminist ideology, is males due to the
overwhelming amount of men in powerful positions (government, law,
etc.). Since the upper class only serves itself, the liberal reform
laws, even if passed, will fail to be implemented due to the
discretionary power of the prosecutor. Therefore, although new laws
that direct the rape accusatory process at the male, the
discretionary powers of the prosecutor still forces a women to
convince others that she was indeed sexually assaulted.

Thus, the rape
reform laws will continue to justify the sexist views and policies of
the status quo, and it will use the rape reform laws to justify
itself. However, these reforms are only skin-deep because of the
amount of discretion the prosecutor has in how he charges and in how
he questions the accuser s character.

OPINION

The author
contends that rape reforms have not achieved the goals in which they
were established to attain. However, the results of Marsh s studies,
primarily in Michigan has shown more filings by the prosecutor (less
reports being turned away), higher conviction rates and arrests in
comparison to other crimes. It seems that the reforms have eased some
of the discrepancies in rape cases, however, it is foolish to see any
law as being a panacea for the criminal justice system.

Once again a
charging issue has come back to the discretionary powers of the
prosecutor. The prosecutor has the power to turn cases down or to
prosecute. In this decision the prosecutor s power is absolute, in
that he may create or dismiss a possible rape charge. Perhaps further
reform is needed in the field of prosecutorial discretion, such as a
rape case review board. Three persons, be they a combination of
lawyers or laipeople, review the facts of the accuser s charge and
make a recommendation to the prosecutor, who still would have the
final decision to charge. The idea is that further studies and ideas
must be put forth in the field of prosecutorial discretion.